现在位置是:首 页 >> 急诊学科 >> 院前急救 >> 推荐文章
关键字:
推荐文章

    字体: | |

机械与人工胸外按压
原作者: Semhar Tewelde, 肖锋译 发布日期:2013-09-11

fTitle: Mechanical vs. Manual Chest Compressions
题目:机械与人工胸外按压
Author 作者: Semhar Tewelde

A recent meta–analysis of 12 studies (6,538 patients with 1,824 ROSC) assessed the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) using either manual vs. mechanical (load-distributing or piston-driven) compressions in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
最近的一项荟萃​​分析报告对12项用人工和机械(负荷均匀按压带或驱动活塞)按压心肺复苏(CPR)的院外心脏骤停研究(6,538例1,824 ROSC)进行了质量评估 。
Compared w/manual CPR, load-distributing band CPR had significantly greater odds of ROSC (odds ratio, 1.62 and p<0.001)
与手动CPR心肺复苏相比,负荷均匀按压带可明显提高ROSC(比值比为1.62,P <0.001)
The treatment effect for piston-driven CPR was similar to manual CPR
活塞驱动CPR的治疗效果与人工心肺复苏类似
The difference in percentages of ROSC rates from CPR was 8.3% for load-distributing band CPR and 5.2% for piston-driven CPR
负荷均匀按压带CPR心肺复苏ROSC率的差异百分比为8.3%,而活塞驱动CPR 为5.2%
Compared with manual CPR, combining both mechanical CPR devices produced a significant treatment effect in favor of higher odds of ROSC with mechanical CPR devices (odds ratio, 1.53 and p<0.001)
与人工心肺复苏相比,这两个机械心肺复苏仪的应用产生了显着的增加ROSC的治疗效果(比值比为1.53,P<0.001)

References 参考文献:
Westfall M, Krantz S, Mullin C, Kaufman C. Mechanical versus manual chest compressions in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Crit Care Med 2013 Jul; 41(7):1782-9